171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19095816)
41. Does digital imaging decrease patient dose? A pilot study and review of the literature.
Neofotistou V; Tsapaki V; Kottou S; Schreiner-Karoussou A; Vano E
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):204-10. PubMed ID: 16464833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Digital radiography: optimization of image quality and dose using multi-frequency software.
Precht H; Gerke O; Rosendahl K; Tingberg A; Waaler D
Pediatr Radiol; 2012 Sep; 42(9):1112-8. PubMed ID: 22526280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Effects of radiographic techniques on the low-contrast detail detectability performance of digital radiography systems.
Alsleem H; U P; Mong KS; Davidson R
Radiol Technol; 2014; 85(6):614-22. PubMed ID: 25002641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Optimising automatic exposure control in computed radiography and the impact on patient dose.
Doyle P; Gentle D; Martin CJ
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):236-9. PubMed ID: 15933114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Flat-panel-detector chest radiography: effect of tube voltage on image quality.
Uffmann M; Neitzel U; Prokop M; Kabalan N; Weber M; Herold CJ; Schaefer-Prokop C
Radiology; 2005 May; 235(2):642-50. PubMed ID: 15858104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography at different exposure doses versus mammography film: possibility of radiation dose reduction in detecting rheumatologic bone defects.
Zähringer M; Reineck S; Perniok A; Krüger K; Andermahr J; Rubbert A; Winnekendonk G
Acta Radiol; 2008 Mar; 49(2):157-66. PubMed ID: 18300139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Effect of dose metrics and radiation risk models when optimizing CT x-ray tube voltage.
Huda W; Ogden KM; Khorasani MR
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Sep; 53(17):4719-32. PubMed ID: 18695298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Effect of x-ray tube parameters and iodine concentration on image quality and radiation dose in cerebral pediatric and adult CT angiography: a phantom study.
Papadakis AE; Perisinakis K; Raissaki M; Damilakis J
Invest Radiol; 2013 Apr; 48(4):192-9. PubMed ID: 23344518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Demonstration of correlations between clinical and physical image quality measures in chest and lumbar spine screen-film radiography.
Sandborg M; Tingberg A; Dance DR; Lanhede B; Almén A; McVey G; Sund P; Kheddache S; Besjakov J; Mattsson S; Månsson LG; Alm Carlsson G
Br J Radiol; 2001 Jun; 74(882):520-8. PubMed ID: 11459731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Calibrating automatic exposure control devices for digital radiography.
Doyle P; Martin CJ
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(21):5475-85. PubMed ID: 17047264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Optimisation of the lateral lumbar spine projection using an air-gap technique.
Bellizzi A; Zarb F
Radiography (Lond); 2020 Aug; 26(3):227-233. PubMed ID: 32052755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. [Study of image quality (contrast) and reduction of patient dose by using heavy metal filters].
Oishi Y; Sano Y; Yoshida K; Iwanaga H; Yasui K; Fujimoto K; Nishimura H; Otsuka A; Sanada T
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2002 Jan; 58(1):109-14. PubMed ID: 12527881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Dose-image optimisation in digital radiology with a direct digital detector: an example applied to pelvic examinations.
Persliden J; Beckman KW; Geijer H; Andersson T
Eur Radiol; 2002 Jun; 12(6):1584-8. PubMed ID: 12042972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Chest radiography with a digital flat-panel detector: experimental receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Metz S; Damoser P; Hollweck R; Roggel R; Engelke C; Woertler K; Renger B; Rummeny EJ; Link TM
Radiology; 2005 Mar; 234(3):776-84. PubMed ID: 15734933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
Gosch D; Jendrass S; Scholz M; Kahn T
Rofo; 2006 Jul; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Comparing the standard knee X-ray exposure factor, 10 kV rule, and modified 10 kV rule techniques in digital radiography to reduce patient radiation dose without loss of image quality.
Wenman A; Lockwood P
Radiography (Lond); 2024 Mar; 30(2):574-581. PubMed ID: 38295494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. [Optimal Beam Quality in Chest Radiography Using CsI-flat Panel Detector for Detection of Pulmonary Nodules].
Oda N; Tabata Y; Mizuta M; Asada Y; Nakano T; Hara T; Kurokawa Y; Aoki T; Uehara S
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2021; 77(4):335-343. PubMed ID: 33883367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. New developed DR detector performs radiographs of hand, pelvic and premature chest anatomies at a lower radiation dose and/or a higher image quality.
Precht H; Tingberg A; Waaler D; Outzen CB
J Digit Imaging; 2014 Feb; 27(1):68-76. PubMed ID: 24221693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Optimization of exposure in panoramic radiography while maintaining image quality using adaptive filtering.
Svenson B; Larsson L; Båth M
Acta Odontol Scand; 2016; 74(3):229-35. PubMed ID: 26478956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. [Reduction of radiation exposure by using storage phosphor radiography on pelvis and lumbar spine].
Heyne JP; Sehner J; Neumann R; Werner B; Adler R; Freesmeyer M; Kaiser WA
Rofo; 2002 Jan; 174(1):104-11. PubMed ID: 11793295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
